The clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1883-1888, 1887-09-28

determine. precedent to the adoption
of restriction or prohibition is, as to the
evil effects of the liquor traffic upon
society. But that is beyond all contro-
versy. The language of Judge Pitman
Is the experience of all criminal judges:
1t Is the universal ally of evil; the
universal antsgonism of good" Judges,
commonwealth attorneys and other civil
officers, with voice of startling una
nlmity, testify TO the criminal results of
the liquor traffic.
Allow me also to say that your views
OF local option" to my mind, are I'M
tenable and lack logical consistency. In
your open letter to me you favor local
option IF confined to narrow limits and
with sufficient majority to assume that
the measure rests on the consent of the
governed" In the Texas letter you
alphabetically characterized it as "the
wooden horse in which disguised
enemy to State sovereignty, as the
guardian of individual liberty, was in
troduced." The difference between
these two utterances may be more ap-
parent than real. The wooden horse"
is inoffensiye sif confined to narrow
AAAuANos Jul DANGEROUS IL dliONcQ VIII
tage ground for wider operations" The
principle of prohibition-the suppress
sion of the liquor traffic by a majority
voice of the people-you, therefore, ad-
nit. So far we are agreed. But how or
why you would conine its operation to
marrow limits" is logically not so clear.
The doctrine of local option is not one
of square yards or miles. If the sover-
eign people of a country by majority
vote decide not to continue or allow the
! liquor traffic in their midst why not the
citizens of the State? There is nothing
in mere territory-in latitude and lon
gitude-at least within State lines, that
nulliies the principle. In your great
| work on the Rise and Fall of the Con-
federate Government" you define as one
of the reserved powers of a sovereign
State "the right of the people to alter
or abolish any form of government, and
| to institute a new one such as to them
shall seem most likely to effect their
safety and happiness" Now if the peo-
| pie of a sovereign State desire to "alter''
their constitution by ENGRAVING upon it
an amendment prohibiting the manufac-
ture AID sale of intoxicating liquors,
| which they regard as conducive to their
| safety and happiness, they undoubtedly
| have the fright" so to do, according to
the above definition. And if by major
| ity vote the measure is adopted-the
consent of the governed" clearly OBJ
tained-why should anyone complain
of sacrificing personal liberty" and
substituting force for free will?' II
the amendment provided for biennial
elections or an elective judiciary, the
complaint would be equally pertinent
and plaintive. The principle, it seem:
to me, is settled.
| ton of anti-prohibitionists In your re-
erences to this effort to control morals
by legislation" and attempting "by coer
Give means The reformation of the
drunkards." There is no question bu
that we can make men immoral by leg
islation. Prohibition laws are no
framed to coerce men to virtue, but tt
protect society-"to guard rights, not tt
produce righteousness" They give mer
a chance to reform themselves, and
proper, legitimate protection to to othel
processes and agencies through which
reformation will come. Such an objec
ton, or rather misconception, applies
| with greater force to Sunday laws, tn,
true purpose of which all great iurists
from Blackstone to the present, have re
| garded as "the corner stone of public
morality and happiness" These law
are not to make men religious; not t.
compel attendance upon any church ser
vice; not to command the adoption o.
any creed; not to force any one t.
spend the day in singing psalms
and saying prayers, but to conserve the
civil interests of government, its moral
commercial, industrial and social well
fare. The parallel is plain.
In the Texas letter you insist that tn,
whole question of intemperance should
be left to education and Christianity
which is repeated in your open letter t.
me, with this important modification
''aided by the laws which have the sane
ton of experience" Just what laws i:
not stated, hence the expression is in
definite. In some sections prohibitory
| laws have the sanction of many years
experience and have very materially
aided "these blessed handmaidens o.
virtue and morality" But should tn,
doctrine obtain that this whole question
must be left to education and religion
|
license law upon the statute books
Why not, also, trust to religion and ed
ucation, to refinement and science,
Sunday dissertation, social purity, lar
ceny, arson, concealed weapons and sucl
like matters, against which law thun
ders its prohibition?
Your kindly words about the Metho
dist Church South, which has been tt
you can object of admiration and CRATE
full affection" are duly appreciated. Blu
with the church | am in perfect ACCORD
on this great question of moral reform
| You, therefore, unduly censure me for
introducing politics" into the organiza-
ton. What you call politics" had
| already been introduced. In their ad
dress to the last General Conference the
bishops of the Methodist Episcopal
Church South said: "In country large
ly governed as this is by the force oil
public opinion it would seem that the
day cannot be far off when the laws OF
the land shall effectually protect society
against men who, for purposes of gain
are ready to destroy the happiness, even
the life, of fellow-being. We congrat.
ulate the church upon the growth of a
healthy public sentiment for temperance
reform, and that the legal suppression
of the liquor traffic throughout the
South has been SO far effected by the
friends of temperance outside of all
complication with party politics"
In response to that part of the bish
ops addres and number of memorials
of like import, the General Conference
adopted the following:
"We rejoice in the widespread and un.
precedented interest, both in and out OF
the church, in the movement in behalf
of temperance and prohibitory law. The
public has awakened to the necessity
both of legal and moral suasion to con-
troll the great evils fostered and stimu-
lated by the liquor traffic.
We cannot withhold our emphatic de-
liverance on the subject, especially in
view Of the prevailing agitation of the
question of prohibition. In view OF
ship, in her spiritual life, in her homes
and hearts, from the destroying power
of strong drink, it well behooves the
General Conference to speak out upon
this subject in unmistakable terms
therefore
"Res olved, That the General Confer
ence of the Methodist Episcopal Church,
South, is opposed to the manufactu re,
sale and use of intoxicating liquors, ex.
cept for medicinal and mechanical pur-
poses, and that we will continue to
agitate the subject of prohibition as
great moral question in sill its bearings
on the life and work of the church, and
strive with all good citizens, and by all
proper and honorable means, to Danish
the horrible evil from our beloved church
and country"
lou make the grave charge that /
sthaye left the nulnif and Bible to mount